DoD Architecture Framework Version 2.0 Models & Illustrative View Examples SOUTHCOM Mr. Charles Thornburg Enterprise Architecture & Standards Directorate Office of the DoD Deputy Chief Information Officer (703) 412-7937 Thornburg_Charles@bah.com

Foundational Concepts in DM2 Before After Overlap Super Sub Type Whole Part Temporal . Service Measure System Organization Activity Performer

Major Concepts in AV-1 Overview and Summary Activity Constraint Guidance Information Measure Organization Performer Project Resource Rule Vision

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information - DARS Registration Example

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information - DARS Registration Example (Cont.)

Architecture Model(s) AV-1 Overview and Summary Information - DARS Registration Example (Cont.) Architecture Model(s) Models

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information - DARS Registration Example (Cont.)

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information - DARS Registration Example (Cont.)

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information - DARS Registration Example (Cont.)

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information – Example 2 Architecture Project Identification Name: Engineering Developing Center Enterprise Architect: Organization Developing the Architecture: Air Force Engineering Developing Center Assumptions and Constraints: Date Completed: 03/01/2009 Scope: Architecture Models Identification Model Developed: OV-1, OV-2, OV-3, OV-4, OV-5a, OV-6c, SV-1, SV-2, SV-3, SV-5a, SV-8, SV-9, StdV-1, StdV-2 Time Frames Addressed: Current Baseline, 07/01/2004 – 07/31/2004 Organizations Involved: Command Group, CIO, Operational Divisions

AV-1 Overview and Summary Information – Example 2 (Cont.) Purpose and Viewpoint Purpose of the Architecture: Reengineering Major Processes From whose viewpoint the Architecture is Developed: Commander Context Mission: Improved Analysis & Evaluation Tasking for Architecture Process and linkages to Other Architectures: Tool and File Formats Used: System Architect tool, Formats: System Architect, Excel, Visio

Major Concepts in AV-2 Integrated Dictionary Activity Agreement Capability Condition Constraint Data Information Guidance Location Materiel Measure Organization Performer Person Type Rule Service Skill Standard System Vision

AV-2 Integrated Dictionary Example Name, DM2 Concept Description Administer Process Mgt Program (PWS 6.1:2.3) ACTIVITY Collaboration, communication, and coordination. - Clearly communicate AEDC and contract priorities. - Ensure all contracted staff actively collaborate, communicate, and coordinate with each other and their Government counterparts. - Ensure information exchanges are timely, thorough and accurate. Advanced Planning & Scheduling ACTIVITY Identify and prioritize all maintenance, repair, and performance improvements needed to meet current and projected operational needs for RDT&E and Test Support assets. Identify the impacts of requirements not funded and recommend alternatives to satisfy those requirements, including incremental solutions that may be feasible. Alternatives shall include critical timelines for accomplishment. [REF: ATA Procedure, P02-6001, 20 Dec 2004] Advocate Center/Laboratory requirements at AFMC ACTIVITY The Deputy CIO will advocate Center/Laboratory requirements at AFMC in the pursuit of Command enterprise solutions as opposed to the propagation of non-standard local development efforts. Aeropropulsion O&M PERFORMER Test operations and maintenance of assets used in direct support of TE20. Safely provide sustainment of test facility operations and maintenance, ID&C systems operations, test article and test unique facility build-up and installations, procedures writing, and hazard analyses, while providing performance workforce to move within TE to support all product areas. Aeropropulsion Plant Ops Br PERFORMER Responsible for plant support of all Aeropropulsion Products Branch testing as well as vacuum plant support for J-4 and J-6 of the Space and Missiles Products Branch. Provide single point integration for operations and maintenance of the ETF and ASTF plants. Aeropropulsion Products Branch PERFORMER Management of the Aeropropulsion T&E Branch

AV-2 Integrated Dictionary Example 2

Capability Viewpoint Articulate the capability requirement, delivery timing, and deployed capability Describes the scope and vision for the capability The delivery phasing and dependencies of the capability The deployment of the capability in a solution

Major Concepts in CV-4 Capability Dependencies Activity Capability Condition Data Guidance Location Measure Organization Performer Person Type Project Resource Rule Service Skill System

CV-4 Capability Dependencies Example Planned Capability Description Existing Capabilities Rules Desired Effect Multi-Engine Concurrent testing The ability to test multiple engines in concurrent test labs 4T, 16T, 16S Test Silo Operations Test to identical specifications to determine competitive advantage in engine selection Increased capability to efficiently, concurrently test engines for potential use in Air Force Aircraft Vertical Engine testing The ability to test engines in a vertical environment simulating engine burn in an orbiter White Oak, 16S test Facilities Test orbiter engines to specification in a vertical environment simulating lift off/ burn in an orbiter Ability to provide NASA and other vendors with realistic testing capability for large orbiter engines

Major Concepts in OV-2 Operational Resource Flow Description Activity Guidance Information Materiel Measure Organization Performer Resource

OV-2 Operational Resource Flow Description Example (Traditional)

OV-2 Operational Resource Flow Description Example (Net-Centric) - Does not depict Command Relationships This can be high level (Network Resources) or detailed. Correspondingly, on the SV-2 or SvcV-2 that supports the OV-2, it can have more details (a website URL) or have several layers, additional layers with more details (specific server names that support a website)

OV-2 Comparison

Major Concepts in OV-5a Activity Decomposition Tree Whole Part

OV-5a Activity Decomposition Tree Example

Project Viewpoint Describes the relationships between operational and capability requirements and the various projects being implemented; Details dependencies between capability management and the Defense Acquisition System process. Associates the Programs, Portfolios, Projects, or Initiatives to requirements Describes a timeline with milestones and dependencies Describes an Organizations’ effort to acquire and deliver Capabilities

Major Concepts in PV-1 Project Portfolio Relationships Activity Constraint Measure Organization Performer Project Resource Rule Vision

PV-1 Project Portfolio Relationships Examples

Major Concepts in PV-2 Project Timelines Activity Condition Constraint Location Materiel Measure Organization Performer Person Type Project Resource Rule Service Skill System Vision

PV-2 Project Timelines Example Forward Thrust Testing Vertical Engine Testing Multi-Engine Concurrent Testing 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q This is High Level, geared toward Decision-makers and associated with activities and capabilities. It does NOT replace day-to-day project management.

Major Concepts in SvcV-6 Services Resource Flow Matrix Activity Condition Data Guidance Information Location Materiel Measure Performer Resource Rule Service Standard

SvcV-6 Services Resource Flow Matrix Example

Standards Viewpoint Articulate applicable Operational, Business, Technical, and Industry policy, standards, guidance, constraints, and forecasts Renamed from Technical Standards View Adds the Operational, Business and Industry standards to the Technical Standards

Major Concepts in StdV-1 Standards Profile Activity Agreement Condition Constraint Data Guidance Location Materiel Measure Organization Performer Project Resource Rule Service Skill Standard System Vision

StdV-1 Standards Profile Example Financial Data Information Exchange SFIS Standard Financial Information Structure is a "common business language" that supports information requirements for budgeting, financial accounting, and cost/performance management. It is available at http://www.bta.mil/SFIS/SFIS_%20Matrix_BEA%206%200.xls Web Services Information Exchange OWL The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by applications that need to process the content of information instead of just presenting information to humans. OWL facilitates greater machine interpretability of Web content than that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema (RDF-S) by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. It is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/

Major Concepts in StdV-2 Standards Forecast Activity Agreement Condition Constraint Data Guidance Location Materiel Measure Organization Performer Project Resource Rule Service Skill Standard System Vision Temporal

StdV-2 Standards Forecast Example

Major Concepts in SV-1 Systems Interface Description Guidance Information Location Materiel Measure Performer Person Type Resource Rule Standard System

SV-1 Systems Interface Description Example

Major Concepts in SV-5a Operational Activity to System Function Traceability Matrix Guidance Information Location Performer Resource Rule System

SV-5a Operational Activity to System Function Traceability Matrix Example

A “Fit-for-Purpose” View - The Cube Has Three Dimensions of Interfaces in DM2’s Concept of System Across WF Functions – an interaction amongst Systems, itself a SoS which is a System. Abstracting the actual Network and Transport systems. VDC-400 TACLINK 2000 EPLRS PRC-117 AN/MRC-142 AN/PRC-150 Exchange DNS Print Server IOS(V)1 IOW C2PC GCCS-J IOS(V)2 MSIDS GCSS-MC AFATDS CPOF INTEL MAN. FIRES LOG. F.P. C2 Router Switch TSM SATCOM As a “vertical” stack that provides the complete means for end-devices to communicate down to transport layer systems (e.g., through MODEM’s, gateways). This “system” is a type of dynamic or ad-hoc system, e.g., dynamic routing Within device-compatible “networks”, e.g., EPRLS. A network is a type of system in DM2 because it is a bunch of systems working together. As another “Fit-for-Purpose” variation, organizational dependencies can be added to this view.

Observations DoDAF V2.0 does not provide examples of the Views. DoDAF V2.0 states the focus is about the data. View examples have been asked of DoD CIO Enterprise Architecture & Standards. Based on questions that have been asked by others, it seems the questions are based on the DoDAFV1.5 paradigm The message about DoDAF V2.0 has to be clarified: Focus should be on the data needed for the Decision-makers and the appropriate Decision Support Systems (Services). The format of Views are up to the Decision-makers.

Questions? 42